Contradiction with Acts 10:15
This verse says, "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common," which suggests that all foods have been made clean, contradicting Exodus 29:33, which restricts certain foods for the priests only.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse states, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man," contrasting the dietary laws and restrictions highlighted in Exodus 29:33.
Matthew 15:11: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
It declares, "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself," which again contradicts the specific clean/unclean food stipulations in Exodus 29:33.
Romans 14:14: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean. [unclean: Gr. common]
Contradiction with Mark 7:18-19
In these verses, Jesus expresses that foods cannot defile a person, negating the idea of designated holy food in Exodus 29:33.
Mark 7:18-19: Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 10:25
This verse advises eating whatever is sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, conflicting with the exclusive consumption detailed in Exodus 29:33.
1 Corinthians 10:25: Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, [that] eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
Paradox #1
Exodus 29:33 refers to the consumption of offerings by priests as part of a consecration ritual. A potential contradiction could arise with other verses that specify offerings should be burnt completely or not eaten at all, such as certain sin offerings where all parts are meant to be burnt on the altar. This might lead to confusion about which offerings can be consumed and by whom.
Paradox #2
The potential contradiction in Exodus 29:33 could involve the concept of exclusivity and fairness. If certain food or offerings are meant only for a specific group (like priests), it may seem unfair or unequal to others who are not allowed to have them. This might conflict with broader ethical ideas about sharing and equality.